[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 18291-18296]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                  REMEMBERING PRESIDENT NELSON MANDELA

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I would like to join my colleagues and 
people all around the world in expressing my

[[Page 18292]]

condolences to the people of South Africa on the passing of their great 
leader Nelson Mandela.
  Nelson Mandela ended his extraordinary autobiography, entitled ``Long 
Walk to Freedom,'' with these words:

       I have walked that long road to freedom. I have tried not 
     to falter; I have made missteps along the way. But I have 
     discovered the secret that after climbing a great hill, one 
     only finds that there are many more hills to climb. I have 
     taken a moment here to rest, to steal a view of the glorious 
     vista that surrounds me, to look back on the distance I have 
     come. But I can rest only for a moment, for with freedom 
     comes responsibilities, and I dare not linger, for my long 
     walk is not yet ended.

  Sadly, President Nelson Mandela's long walk and his noble life are 
indeed now ended, but his influence on the world will endure for a long 
time to come. As the editorial cartoonist for the Washington Post put 
it, Nelson Mandela was ``larger than life--and death.''
  Through enormous strength of character and a determination unlike 
many people in this world, Nelson Mandela helped his beloved South 
Africa to end the vicious system of apartheid and begin a new walk 
toward multiracial democracy. His dream, he often said, was that South 
Africa would become ``a rainbow nation at peace with itself and with 
the world.''
  Nelson Mandela astonished the world with his capacity to forgive--
even to forgive those who jailed him and persecuted his family. There 
was an interview on television I saw yesterday morning on ABC in which 
Nelson Mandela spoke about his imprisonment shortly after he had been 
released. He had spent 27 years in prison, part of it on Robben Island, 
which I have had the opportunity to visit, to actually stand in Nelson 
Mandela's tiny cell. It is an island off of Capetown. The waters around 
it are shark infested so the prisoners won't try to escape from that 
island. They can just barely make out the land mass away from that 
island, but they are separated--separated on this piece of land in the 
middle of this ocean. There Nelson Mandela lived for almost 25 years. 
He lived in this cell, many times in isolation. He labored in a quarry 
nearby, which we visited. The sunlight bouncing off of the rocks in 
that quarry virtually blinded him for the rest of his life. He wore 
sunglasses and begged photographers not to use flashbulbs the rest of 
his life because of the damage that had been done to his eyes.
  The prisoners on Robben Island--many of them sharing his political 
philosophy and opposing apartheid--tried to create a university 
atmosphere where they taught one another all they could remember and 
all they knew. They devoured information from the outside world in an 
effort to try to keep in touch with what was going on.
  In this interview, as he was released from his imprisonment, Nelson 
Mandela was asked by the interviewer about his warden and his guards at 
the prison. He talked about the deep emotional ties they developed, how 
this guard he came to know--I believe his name was Gregory--was a real 
gentleman, in the words of Nelson Mandela, and how, when Mandela was 
finally released, there was a moment of emotion as they knew they would 
part after all these years of such a close relationship. I recall that 
story because so many times when I have given commencement addresses I 
have used as an example Nelson Mandela's decision, when elected 
President of South Africa, to invite that guard from his prison to be 
there as one of his honored guests at his inauguration as President of 
South Africa. That, to me, speaks volumes.
  Nelson Mandela taught us powerful lessons about justice, tolerance, 
and reconciliation. As the first democratically elected President of 
South Africa, Mandela was the father of a new nation. Like George 
Washington, the father of our Nation, he chose consciously, 
deliberately, to walk away from power. In doing so, he reminded us that 
the peaceful, orderly transition of power is one of the hallmarks of a 
real democracy.
  The prestigious Ibrahim Prize for Achievement in African Leadership 
was created in 2007 to recognize African leaders who served their 
people by voluntarily stepping down from power, as President Mandela 
did. Sadly, this year, for the second year in a row, the award 
committee couldn't identify one African leader who met that standard. 
Leaders in neighboring Zimbabwe, as well as Syria, Egypt, Venezuela, 
Cuba, and so many other nations torn by conflict and manipulated 
divisions, would do well to ponder this measure of Nelson Mandela's 
greatness.
  One of the great honors of my life was meeting President Mandela when 
he came to Washington in September 1998, near the end of his 
Presidency, to receive the Congressional Gold Medal. The Congressional 
Gold Medal is the highest honor this Congress can bestow on a civilian. 
President Mandela noted that he was humbled to be the first African to 
ever receive it.
  In his brief remarks at the Gold Medal ceremony, President Mandela 
thanked the American people and Congress for our help in bringing an 
end to the odious system of apartheid through congressionally imposed 
economic sanctions and other measures. These are Nelson Mandela's 
words:

       If today the people of South Africa are free at last to 
     address their basic needs; if the countries of southern 
     Africa have the opportunity to realize the potential for 
     development through cooperation; if Africa can devote all her 
     energies and resources to her reconstruction; then it is not 
     least because the American people identified with and lent 
     their support to the struggle to end apartheid, including 
     critically through action by this Congress.

  I remember that battle. I remember that debate. I was brand new to 
the U.S. House of Representatives, just a few years in service, and the 
debate came up as to whether the United States would continue to impose 
sanctions on the apartheid racist Government of South Africa. I sat on 
the floor, convinced that we should do so, and listened to the critics 
of that policy. Many of them came to the floor and said things I 
couldn't believe. They characterized Nelson Mandela as nothing more 
than a Communist who should never be trusted to lead that country. I 
thought to myself, he might have had a flirtation with communism at 
some point in his life, but this man is speaking to the basic 
principles that are consistent with America's values and principles.
  I found it interesting last week, after Nelson Mandela died, to read 
the editorial in the Wall Street Journal about Nelson Mandela. I 
commend it to people to understand where that thinking came from, that 
belief that the United States should not be involved in trying to 
strike down the apartheid form of government. If you will read that 
editorial about Nelson Mandela's death, you will find the following 
names mentioned: Carl Marx, Lenin--I am trying to recall who else. I 
think Che Guevara was mentioned, as well as communism. Stalin was 
mentioned in there. In just a few sentences about Nelson Mandela, the 
Wall Street Journal editors decided to put all those names in there as 
touchstones and reference points to his life. It is an indication of 
how people can get it just plain wrong even at the highest levels of 
journalism in the United States, as they did in the debate in Congress.
  We passed the sanctions legislation in--I believe the year was 1985 
or 1986. We sent it to President Reagan, and he vetoed it. We overrode 
President Reagan's veto so that the sanctions went forward to condemn 
apartheid and do what we could to change it in South Africa 30 years 
ago.
  I can recall that because a Congressman at the time, Howard Wolpe of 
Michigan, was the chairman of the Africa subcommittee. He came to me 
one day as a new Member of the House and said: I want to do a 
congressional delegation trip to Africa. Would you like to go?
  I said: I would be honored. I have never been there, and I would like 
to go.
  We put our itinerary together, included South Africa, and then, when 
we applied for visas, that apartheid government denied visas to all the 
Members of Congress who had voted for sanctions, which included 
Chairman Wolpe and myself, and so the trip never took place. It took 
several years, a change in government, and the arrival of Nelson 
Mandela to see a welcoming South Africa and visas issued to Members of 
Congress who wished to visit.

[[Page 18293]]

  President Mandela asked the American Congress and the people to 
continue to walk with the people of South Africa to help them develop 
their economy and strengthen their democracy. As I have said, I have 
traveled to the countries in Africa. I have seen the progress that can 
occur when governments are accountable to their people and really serve 
democracy. This Congress can pay a truly fitting tribute to President 
Mandela's life by heeding the request he made to us to help Africa, to 
help South Africa strengthen its economies in ways that will benefit 
not only that continent but the United States of America.
  I mentioned earlier the parallels between President Washington and 
President Mandela. Nelson Mandela was also his nation's Abraham 
Lincoln. I do not exaggerate. I will close with a story.
  We all know the words of President Lincoln's majestic second 
inaugural address, which took place right outside those doors. It was 
in 1865. As he looked forward to the end of the Civil War, he turned to 
this war-torn nation that had lost so many in this battle that had gone 
on for years, and he said:

       With malice toward none; with charity for all; with 
     firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let 
     us strive on to finish the work we are on.

  A friend would later note that Lincoln's features when he gave that 
address were ``haggard with care, tempest tossed and weather beaten.'' 
But with the nightmare of the Civil War almost over, Washington, DC, 
was poised for a joyous celebration of victory.
  For the first time, African-American troops marched down the streets 
in the inaugural parade after President Lincoln gave that address, and 
Blacks mingled with the inaugural crowd right outside here on the 
Capitol lawn.
  It was a rainy, overcast day when Lincoln gave his second inaugural 
address. But a friend of his noted: Just as President Lincoln stepped 
forward to take the oath of office, the Sun, which had been obscured by 
rain clouds, burst forth in splendor. President Lincoln saw it. The 
next day the President asked a friend: Did you notice that sunburst? It 
made my heart jump.
  The skies were also overcast the day Nelson Mandela received the 
Congressional Gold Medal here in Washington. On that day, the dark 
bronze bust of Martin Luther King, Jr., had been moved from one side of 
the Rotunda so that Lincoln and Dr. Martin Luther King appeared to 
preside together over the ceremony awarding the Congressional Gold 
Medal to Nelson Mandela. As President Mandela started to speak, rays of 
sunlight began to pour into the Rotunda. They illuminated the base of 
the statues first and then rose gradually until, by the time President 
Mandela finished speaking, both Lincoln and King were bathed in bright 
sunlight. With a little imagination, you could almost hear Lincoln say: 
Did you notice that sunburst? It made my heart jump.
  Like Lincoln, President Mandela now belongs to the ages. And while 
our hearts are heavy today with President Mandela's passing, the world 
can take inspiration from the lessons he taught us while he walked 
among us.


              Remembering Du Quoin Mayor John Rednour, Sr.

  As we mourn the passing of Nelson Mandela, the great noble leader who 
changed history, we also take a moment to recall other leaders closer 
to home. One of those leaders, and a friend of mine, had his memorial 
service this week. His name was not well known to many outside of 
southern Illinois, but he was a good man and a good friend, and he 
worked throughout his life to create opportunities and a sense of 
community. His name was John Rednour, although almost everybody skipped 
the first name and called him Rednour. He passed away on December 1, at 
age 78. He had just retired as mayor of Du Quoin, IL, a small town in 
southern Illinois, where he presided as mayor for a remarkable 24 
years. During his tenure, he prided himself on balancing the budget and 
investing in the city's future. He did it year after year.
  Amazingly, public service was his third career. John Rednour began 
his working life as an ironworker--a member of the United Ironworkers. 
He also worked as a shoemaker. In 1970, he moved to Du Quoin with his 
wife Wanda and three kids. In the early 1980s, he began his second 
career, when he brought together local shareholders and took control of 
a struggling local bank. He converted it into one of the soundest, most 
profitable banks in southern Illinois. But it was John Rednour's third 
career--his work as mayor of Du Quoin--that really distinguished his 
public service. As a mayor, he was a fiscal conservative. But he was 
also a person who believed in giving people a chance.
  John Rednour was a proud Democrat. In fact, he was the former 
chairman of the Illinois Democratic Party. He rode on Air Force One 
with President Jimmy Carter and had good relationships with Presidents 
including President Obama. The politicians whose careers he helped 
launch or advance could have filled a stadium. But he knew there were 
things more important than party politics. He always made it a habit to 
meet with new Du Quoin city council members and offered the same 
advice: Do what is good for Du Quoin. Do what is right for the people. 
That is certainly good advice for any officeholder.
  Over the years, my wife Loretta and I were fortunate to be visitors 
at John Rednour's home at their annual State fair parties for the Du 
Quoin State fair. We always appreciated seeing that great crowd at the 
social event of southern Illinois for the year, and then staying 
overnight and waking up in the morning as Wanda, his wife, made her 
famous Texas pancakes. We loved them. And people gathered from all over 
the community as Wanda kept making the pancakes.
  John's funeral last week was attended by the Governor of our State, 
Pat Quinn, Members of Congress, including current Congressman Bill 
Enyart, former Congressmen Glenn Poshard, Jerry Costello, and Ken Gray, 
and many other elected officials.
  The anecdote that best captured the spirit of John Rednour was 
offered in eulogy by his grandson. He said he once asked his 
grandfather why he gave money to homeless people every time he saw 
them. John Rednour replied: Because it's the right thing to do. Simple 
as that, it was the right thing to do.
  Carl Sandburg, another son of Illinois, wrote a poem called ``Prayers 
of Steel.'' It is a prayer of a working person asking for a useful 
life. John Rednour was an ironworker. These words about a steelworker 
apply to him as well:

     Lay me on an anvil, O God.
     Beat me and hammer me into a crowbar.
     Let me pry loose old walls.
     Let me lift and loosen old foundations.
     Lay me on an anvil, O God.
     Beat me and hammer me into a steel spike.
     Drive me into the girders that hold a skyscraper together.
     Take red-hot rivets and fasten me into the central girders.
     Let me be the great nail holding a skyscraper through blue 
           nights into white stars.

  John Rednour must have prayed those words, or something like them, 
often. And God must have heard them, because John Rednour achieved much 
good in his life--a leader of workers, a businessman, a banker, a 
mayor, a husband, father, grandfather, great-grandfather, and a friend 
to legions.
  For decades, John Rednour was the great nail that held his community 
together and helped move it forward. His contributions will enable his 
beloved Du Quoin to continue to reach for the stars for years to come.


                            The Minimum Wage

  Mr. President, last week fast-food workers across the country led a 
1-day strike to bring attention to low-wage workers who can't make a 
living on their current wages. In Chicago, 200 workers took to the 
streets.
  But this is only one part of a much larger debate, a debate in recent 
days about the growing economic disparities in the United States of 
America and the struggles of low-wage workers.
  In November, Pope Francis stated:

       While the earnings of a minority are growing exponentially, 
     so too is the gap separating the majority from the prosperity 
     enjoyed by those happy few.

  Just last week, President Obama echoed those concerns in an address 
on

[[Page 18294]]

income inequality. He spoke at the Center for American Progress, and he 
noted that more than half of all Americans at some point in their lives 
will experience poverty.
  The week before Thanksgiving, a Walmart in Ohio was running a food 
drive to help the hungry have a happy Thanksgiving. That kind of 
generosity and empathy is commendable. What was noteworthy, though, is 
the food drive was specifically to support their associates--their own 
employees. It reminded me of an effort McDonald's launched earlier this 
year to help their employees create a budget. According to that budget, 
the only way to make ends meet for someone making minimum wage and 
working 40 hours at McDonald's was to take a second job.
  Washington Post's Wonkblog analyzed the chart and found that a worker 
making minimum wage would have to work 75 hours a week to have the 
aftertax income this company thought was basic to a family budget.
  Low wages aren't a problem just in the fast-food industry, and I 
don't want to pick on Walmart and McDonald's. It is catching up in many 
other traditional jobs that used to be able to support a family.
  There may be fewer better examples of this than in the banking 
sector. The banking industry in America last year posted $141.3 billion 
in profits. The median executive pay in the banking industry in America 
is $552,000 a year. Yet a recent report found that 39 percent of bank 
tellers in the State of New York are on public assistance.
  Low-wage work is just not enough to get by. Working 40 hours a week 
at $7.25 translates into $15,080 a year. That is about $400 less than 
the Federal poverty level guidelines for a family of two.
  If you accept the sample budget we have talked about, a worker making 
the minimum wage would have to work 75 hours a week to have the 
aftertax income necessary to make ends meet. Working 75 hours a week at 
a minimum wage with few or no vacation days and limited benefits, if 
any, you can make $24,720 a year after taxes. I want to say it is not 
impossible to do that, but the reality is many people actually have to 
do it. How do you raise a family working 75 hours a week? When do you 
have time to sit down with your kids and even read a book?
  One way people get by is they are forced to turn to government 
assistance programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 
Program, the SNAP program, historically known as food stamps, or the 
LIHEAP program, Low Income Heating and Energy Assistance Program, which 
helps to pay for heating and cooling bills; the Children's Health 
Insurance Program, the CHIP program, which provides health insurance 
for the children of the poorest families; the Emergency Food Assistance 
Program, TEFAP; the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program, 
TANF; the section 8 housing program; and, yes, the Affordable Care Act, 
which is providing for the first time health insurance for some of the 
working poor who have never had insurance as a benefit at any time in 
their lives.
  According to a recent study at the University of California-Berkeley 
undertaken in partnership with the University of Illinois, 52 percent 
of families of fast-food workers are on public assistance. Thirty-nine 
percent of the bank tellers in New York, 52 percent of the families of 
fast-food workers are on public assistance.
  Subsidizing low-wage employment through these programs costs the 
Federal Government $3.9 billion annually. Think about what that means. 
It means that working families across America paying their taxes are 
not only sustaining this government, they are sustaining the low-wage 
workers in their communities who cannot survive without a helping hand 
from a government program that keeps food on the table or may provide 
health insurance.
  Instead of trying to find solutions to ensure full-time work so it is 
adequate to support a family, many of my colleagues are now attacking 
these programs. The House Republicans oppose the farm bill primarily 
because they want to make deep cuts in the food stamp program for 
families barely getting by and feeding their children. That strikes me 
as wrong. We are too good a Nation.
  If we are going to have a political fight over saving money and 
cutting spending, for goodness sake, let's not start first with the 
children, the elderly, the disabled, and the veterans who are receiving 
food stamps. That, to me, defines the politics and the values of some 
Members of Congress.
  SNAP is the first place many people turn when they struggle, this 
food stamp program. At a time when almost 15 percent of households in 
America have trouble keeping food on the table, SNAP helps 47 million 
Americans buy their groceries. In Illinois, more than 2 million 
people--about one in seven of our residents--rely on food stamp 
benefits. In my lifetime, we have seen many companies that are selling 
food across America now finding they are selling a large part to those 
who are coming in with food stamps.
  After working at a grocery store all day, imagine having to turn to 
your SNAP benefits to buy the groceries you need to take home to feed 
your family; or, after working at a grocery store all day, you go to 
your local food bank. I have visited quite a few of those. I am sure 
the Presiding Officer has too. What is amazing going to a food bank is 
the people who are there. They are not the people you might expect. 
Some of them are elderly people on Social Security, barely getting by. 
They need that food bank, twice a month sometimes, to have enough food 
on the table to live for another month.
  There are also a lot of people who work for a living in those food 
banks. I remember going to central Illinois and visiting one of those 
food bank warehouses. I saw a well-dressed young lady there who I 
thought was on the staff. I learned later she was a single mom with two 
kids. She had a part-time job that didn't pay very well. She qualified 
for food stamps and also went to the food bank with some frequency. But 
she wanted to come and thank me, because the food stamp program now 
allowed her to use her food stamp benefits at farmers markets so she 
could take her kids out to buy fresh fruits and vegetables at that time 
of year. For her it was a great side trip for the kids to meet the 
farmers and learn a little more about life here. She thought getting 
them the food was secondary to that experience for which she wanted to 
come and thank me.
  The farm bill conference needs to reach an agreement which will not 
penalize the poorest people in America--not penalize the children, the 
veterans, the elderly, and the disabled who count on food stamps.
  One of the biggest challenges we face is to make sure our workers all 
across America have a minimum wage they can get by on, have food 
stamps, if necessary, but also have access to health insurance. That is 
where the Affordable Care Act comes in. Now 1.8 million Illinoisans 
have no health insurance. Many are going to have their first chance to 
be covered by health insurance because of the Affordable Care Act. 
According to the Congressional Budget Office, 12 million people in 
America are going to be eligible for Medicaid, and 23 million will for 
the first time buy private health insurance, and they won't be 
discriminated against because someone in the family has a preexisting 
condition. They will not be caught in a situation where there are 
limits on the amount of coverage these policies offer. They are going 
to have opportunities for preventive care and regular wellness 
checkups. For many of them it is going to be the first time in their 
lives they have ever had this luxury and peace of mind.
  We have to protect these programs and we have to do more. More and 
more working families make it clear that the Federal minimum wage needs 
to be increased. Since 1967 it has gone up $1.40 to $7.25. This may 
seem like significant progress, but when you adjust it to current 
dollars, the value of the minimum wage has actually declined over that 
period by 12 percent. Had the minimum wage kept up with inflation, it 
would be $10.74 today, not $7.25.
  If the minimum wage is increased to $10.10--which I support and we 
want to

[[Page 18295]]

bring it to the floor for a vote--more than 30 million American workers 
will get a raise. What will they do with that money? They will go 
shopping, of course. They live paycheck to paycheck. A little more 
money means shoes, clothes, food, the basics in life. When they go 
shopping and create more economic activity, it creates even more jobs.
  Workers in America--full-time workers, hard-working Americans--are 
falling behind through no fault of their own. Attacking or cutting 
programs that help these struggling families is just wrong. We have to 
work together to help them.
  In the coming weeks I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle 
will restore the bipartisan tradition of supporting working families. I 
urge my colleagues to support an increase in the minimum wage and to 
resist these efforts to make deep cuts in the food stamp, or SNAP, 
program.
  I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


                           Order of Procedure

  Mr. REID. This is an announcement to all the Senators. Due to the 
myriad of problems with the weather, there are Senators who are still 
stranded and trying to get here, so we are going to have to put off the 
votes this afternoon. We will not have votes this afternoon. We will 
have votes in the morning.
  I ask unanimous consent that the previous order with respect to the 
vote on the confirmation of the Millett nomination be modified so the 
vote will follow leader remarks on Tuesday, December 10. Also, there 
will be no morning business tomorrow morning. Following leader remarks, 
we will go right to the business of the day.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I apologize to everyone for the late notice, 
but we have been trying to scramble around to see if we could have 
enough participation tonight. Most people have been able to get here, 
but some of them--certainly it is not their fault--tried to get here 
last night and still are not here. I am sorry for the late notice, but 
that is where we are.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Coons). The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. MURPHY. I ask unanimous consent to speak in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                       Undetectable Firearms Act

  Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, we are about to hit the 1-year mark since 
the tragic shooting in Sandy Hook, CT, which took the lives of 20 
little boys and girls, 6- and 7-year-olds, and 6 of their educators who 
cared for them.
  It should be a source of great embarrassment to the Senate and the 
House of Representatives that we have not moved the ball forward 1 inch 
when it comes to the issue of protecting the thousands of people all 
across this country who are killed by guns every year. This is the case 
even while 90 percent of Americans agree that people should have proof 
that they are not a criminal before they buy a gun and that there is 
really no reason why we should allow military-style weapons to get into 
the hands of ordinary Americans. We should be embarrassed by the fact 
that we are not doing more to try to stem the scourge of gun violence 
that plagues our Nation today. But we should be even more embarrassed 
if this week we cannot pass a commonsense extension and update to the 
Undetectable Firearms Act, a bipartisan piece of legislation that has 
been on the books since 1988. Most people in this country have no idea 
it exists because up until this week it has been so noncontroversial.
  In an effort to explain to my colleagues a little bit about why this 
is so important, I wish to take my colleagues back 60 years to World 
War II. In World War II the allies developed a very small firearm 
called the Liberator. The Liberator was capable of only firing one 
shot. It was a very small, little gun. The idea was that we would get 
this out to the resistance movement in Europe and they would be able to 
conceal this very small firearm so they could get close enough to a 
German soldier, use the one bullet in the gun to kill the soldier, and 
then take his weapon. That program never went very far.
  Fast forward to 70 years later, to a University of Texas student who 
came up with a design for a new undetectable firearm--a plastic gun 
that can be reproduced on what is now known as the 3D printer--named 
the Liberator. It is very similar to the gun that was developed by the 
resistance movement during World War II. Witness also the fact that 
once he posted the plans for that plastic undetectable gun online, 
those plans were downloaded 100,000 times in short order across this 
country before the Department of State used its authority to take down 
those plans.
  I don't know exactly what the designs for this gun were, but it can 
be used in the exact same way the original Liberator gun was used. It 
is a plastic gun which is undetectable by imaging equipment, by metal 
detectors. It can be used to get into a very secure place such as, 
let's say, a government building. The ones being designed today, such 
as the one the young guy in Texas put online, can't fire more than a 
couple of bullets, but it can fire enough bullets to injure a law 
enforcement officer or a security officer, take their gun, and do even 
more damage.
  So we have two problems today when it comes to this new issue of 
undetectable plastic guns:
  First, the law passed in 1988 that bans the manufacture, possession, 
or sale of undetectable firearms--firearms that can't be picked up with 
a metal detector, that can essentially move into secure locations 
without being identified--expires today. If we don't pass an extension, 
tomorrow it will be legal in this country to create an undetectable 
firearm.
  The second problem is this new technology that is pretty widely 
available, already called 3D printing, has made it very easy to make 
firearms that comply with the existing law but are still potentially 
undetectable.
  Why is that? Because to be a legal weapon, you have to have a certain 
amount of the weapon be metal so it can be picked up by a metal 
detector or an x ray machine. But because we can now make very 
creatively constructed weapons with 3-D printers, that piece of metal 
can be easily removed before it goes through a metal detector and still 
be used without the metal on the other side of the detection unit, thus 
essentially erasing the benefit of having a metal component if the 
metal component can just be stripped out.
  It is a pretty simple update we have to make here. All we have to say 
is that the metal piece of the gun has to be integral to the firing 
mechanism of the gun so that if you take the metal out to get it 
through a metal detector it does not work on the other end. But we are 
having a hard time getting that commonsense update--just recognizing 
the advancement of technology--passed in the Senate and in the House of 
Representatives.
  So we have these two problems: one, the underlying bill--which is 
still really good law even without the update--is expiring. We have to 
pass it here. Second, we need this update to be taken care of.
  This is not science fiction anymore. The threat of undetectable 
firearms has always been around and that is why in 1988 both parties 
got together to pass it. It has been extended since then. But it is no 
longer science fiction that somebody can make a gun in their basement 
basically obliterating the utility of all of our Nation's firearms

[[Page 18296]]

laws and use it to perpetrate great evil throughout this country.
  Mr. President, 3-D printers cost only about $2,000 today. Most 
futurists are pretty certain that in maybe a decade or more most 
Americans will have access to this technology. Just like the 
photocopier and the personal computer seemed out of reach at some point 
for most middle-class Americans, maybe today the 3-D printer is, but in 
a decade or more it might be another household appliance that sits 
right next to your computer printer.
  Second, we know how dangerous plastic guns are because people have 
tested this premise. One investigative journalist in Israel took a 
plastic gun into the Israeli Parliament--got through the serious 
security that surrounds that building, got into the Parliament, and sat 
10 rows behind Benjamin Netanyahu with a plastic gun in his possession. 
So this is not science fiction. It is not just a perceived or imagined 
threat. This is real, this is now, and we have to do something about 
it.
  One of the things that has happened in the wake of Sandy Hook is that 
schools have invested in enormous amounts of security. I am somebody 
who does not believe ultimately that is the way you keep schools safe. 
But to the extent that schools have put in more metal detectors, have 
put in more security platforms around their entryways and exit ways, it 
does not do any good if somebody can walk through that school, who 
wants to do great damage within it, with a plastic firearm that will be 
legal in this country in one way, shape, or form if we do not pass an 
updated version of this bill right now this week.
  It is time we recognize the future is here, plastic guns are real. As 
we approach the 1-year anniversary of the most horrific school shooting 
this country has ever seen, it is time for us to do what we have many 
times before: reauthorize and update the Undetectable Firearms Act.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________